Speeding in Residential Areas 2nd Edition

Guide No.3 (2010)

The Problem of Speeding in Residential Areas

What This Guide Does and Does Not Cover

This guide addresses the problem of speeding in residential areas, one of the most common sources of citizen complaints to the police. The guide begins by describing the problem and reviewing factors that increase its risks. It then identifies a series of questions to help you analyze your local speeding problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the problem and what is known about them from evaluative research and police practice. †

Speeding in residential areas is but one aspect of the larger set of problems related to speeding and traffic safety. This guide is limited to addressing the particular harms created by speeding in residential areas. Related problems not directly addressed in this guide, each of which requires separate analysis, include the following:

aggressive and reckless driving (commonly referred to as "road rage"),

drunken driving,

inattentive driving,

pedestrian injuries and fatalities,

running of red lights,

speeding and traffic crashes on highways,

speeding and traffic crashes on rural roads,

street racing, and

traffic congestion around schools.

Other guides in this series—all listed at the end of this guide—cover some of these related problems. For the most up-to-date listing of current and future guides, see www.popcenter.org

General Description of the Problem

Speeding in residential areas is often community groups' chief concern, largely because of the perceived risks to children. Yet because speeding must compete with other problems for police attention, problems that may appear far more serious, police often do not devote a lot of resources to it.

Speeding in residential areas causes five basic types of harm:

it makes citizens fear for children's safety;

it makes pedestrians and bicyclists fear for their safety;

it increases the risk of vehicle crashes;

it increases the seriousness of injuries to a speeder's own passenger(s) and to other drivers and passenger(s), pedestrians and bicyclists a vehicle strikes; and

it increases noise from engine acceleration and tire friction.

Speeding increases the risks of crashes and injuries for several reasons:

the driver is more likely to lose control of the vehicle;

the vehicle safety equipment is less effective at higher speeds;

the distance it takes to stop the vehicle is greater;

the vehicle travels farther during the time it takes the driver to react to a hazard; and

Factors Contributing to Speeding in Residential Areas

Understanding the factors that contribute to your problem will help you frame your own local analysis questions, determine good effectiveness measures, recognize key intervention points, and select appropriate responses.

Even modestly higher speeds can spell the difference between life and death for pedestrians struck by a vehicle. The impact's force on the human body is more than one-third greater at 35 mph than at 30 mph.2Each one-mph reduction in average speeds translates roughly to a 5 percent reduction in vehicle crashes.3

Speeders are disproportionately involved in vehicle crashes.4 Speeding is a contributing factor in about one-eighth of all crashes and in about one-third of all fatal crashes.5 Most crashes occur in urban areas, although most fatalities occur on more-remote highways.6

Beliefs and Attitudes About Speeding

Many cultures heavily promote speeding, giving it a generally positive social image. Vehicle advertisements often show driving that would be unsafe for average drivers on real roads. Most drivers do not think speeding is a particularly serious or dangerous offense, except in areas where children might be present.7 Drivers tend to overestimate their driving skills and underestimate the crash risks.8 Drivers tend to feel they can travel seven to eight mph over the posted speed limit without the police's citing them.9Chronic speeders also have a greater likelihood of being involved in crashes.10

Speed-related vehicle collisions are more commonly thought of and referred to as "accidents" rather than "crashes," suggesting that collisions are not drivers' fault. Studies in Canada and Australia, as well as in the United States, have found that a driver's risk of a crash increases in direct proportion to the number of times police have cited the driver for speed violations in the past.11

Many drivers admit to speeding in residential areas.12 Their reasons for speeding include running late and wanting to make up for lost time, being unaware of the speed limit and trying to keep up with other traffic.13 The most important factor in determining speed is the driver's perception of the road environment and of what speed is safe to drive.14†† Whatever drivers' specific reasons, it appears they make calculated decisions to speed,15 creating opportunities for the police to alter their calculations.†††

From a wider social policy perspective, reducing speed must be balanced with other goals such as promoting a healthy economy (which partly entails getting goods and services delivered quickly), reducing environmental pollution and promoting healthful behavior (by encouraging walking, running and bicycling).16

†† Traffic engineers take drivers' perceptions into account in setting speed limits. The common standard for a posted speed limit is the speed at which 85 percent of drivers travel at or below, known as the 85th-percentile speed (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1997).

††† For detailed information on drivers' habits, attitudes and beliefs, see National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (1998); U.K. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1998); and Corbett and Simon (1992).

Understanding Your Local Problem

The information provided above is only a generalized description of speeding in residential areas. You must combine the basic facts with a more specific understanding of your local problem. Analyzing the local problem carefully will help you design a more effective response strategy.

Stakeholders

In addition to criminal justice agencies, the following groups have an interest in the speeding-in- residential-areas problem, and you should consider the contribution they might make to gathering information about the problem and responding to it:

neighborhood and business associations (these associations often receive complaints about speeding and can mobilize support from the local government);

local government agencies and committees that deal with traffic engineering, public transportation, planning, and noise abatement (these agencies and committees have useful data, expertise and resources); and

school boards, school administrators and school parent associations (these groups have special interests in protecting students' safety around schools, capacities to mobilize support and resources that they might dedicate)

Asking the Right Questions

The following are some critical questions you should ask in analyzing your particular problem of speeding in residential areas, even if the answers are not always readily available. Your answers to these and other questions will help you choose the most appropriate responses later on.

Crashes and Complaints

How many crashes occur in residential areas? How many are crashes with other vehicles? Pedestrians? Bicyclists?

How serious are the injuries?

What percentage of crashes in residential areas are speed-related?

How, specifically, do the speed-related crashes occur? A single vehicle's going off the road? Multiple vehicles' crashing into one another? Head-on, rear-end, side-impact crashes?

Are there multiple factors involved, such as speeding to make it through yellow traffic lights?

How many complaints do police receive about speeding in residential areas? What, specifically, do citizens complain about? Actual crashes? Fear of walking or riding? Noise?

Speeders

Who are the most frequent offenders? Area residents? Commuters? Visitors? Why do they say they speed? Where are they coming from? Where are they going?

Who are the worst offenders? How fast do they drive?

Locations/Times

On which specific streets or blocks is speeding a problem? On what days and at what times? (Computer mapping software can help you answer many questions about where and when the problem occurs.)

Is the speed limit prominently posted?

Is the speed limit proper for road conditions? Too high? Too low? What is the 85th-percentile speed?

What road conditions make speeding more likely? Can these conditions be modified?

Do crashes occur at intersections, on straight roads or at curves?

Current Responses

How much do officers conduct speed enforcement in the problem areas now? What factors determine where they conduct it? Do police conduct speed and crash studies before targeting particular locations for enforcement?

What is the formal or informal tolerance range before officers issue citations? What do most drivers think it is?

Do officers give warnings in lieu of citations? Do they officially record those warnings? What criteria do they use in deciding to give warnings?

Does the law allow police to use speed cameras? If so, do they use them in residential areas?

What are the typical fines and penalties for speeding in the problem areas? Do they seem to be meaningful consequences for offenders?

Have officers used speed-display boards in problem areas?

Do officers work closely with road and traffic engineers to establish speed limits, develop traffic-calming strategies, and identify and correct speed-related problems?

Measuring Your Effectiveness

Measurement allows you to determine to what degree your efforts have succeeded, and suggests how you might modify your responses if they are not producing the intended results. You should take measures of your problem before you implement responses, to determine how serious the problem is, and after you implement them, to determine whether they have been effective. You should take all measures in both the target area and the surrounding area. (For more detailed guidance on measuring effectiveness, see the companion guide to this series, Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers.)

Speeding, unlike so many other problems the police must address, allows for precise measurement-of speeds, crashes, causes, complaints, etc. Measures of the effectiveness of responses to speeding problems, therefore, can and should be reliable and accurate. The following are potentially useful measures of the effectiveness of responses to speeding in residential areas:

the average speeds of vehicles (taken in mid-blocks),

the percentage of vehicles speeding,

the percentage of vehicles exceeding the speed limit by various amounts,

the number of vehicle crashes,

the number of injuries vehicle crashes cause,

the severity of injuries vehicle crashes cause, and

the volume of citizen complaints about speeding.

The number of citations issued is not an appropriate measure of the your responses' impact; it merely provides information about police enforcement levels. Pay attention to your efforts' possible displacement effects: drivers may divert to adjoining areas or roads, with positive or negative results. †

Responses to the Problem of Speeding in Residential Areas

Your analysis of your local problem should give you a better understanding of the factors contributing to it. Once you have analyzed your local problem and established a baseline for measuring effectiveness, you should consider possible responses to address the problem.

The following response strategies provide a foundation of ideas for addressing your particular problem. These strategies are drawn from a variety of research studies and police reports. Several of these strategies may apply to your community's problem. It is critical that you tailor responses to local circumstances, and that you can justify each response based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing several different responses.

Law enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the problem. Do not limit yourself to considering what police can do: carefully consider whether others in your community share responsibility for the problem and can help police better respond to it. The responsibility of responding, in some cases, may need to be shifted toward those who have the capacity to implement more-effective responses. (For more-detailed information on shifting and sharing responsibility, see Response Guide No. 3, Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems).

Engineering Responses

1. Using traffic calming. Traffic-calming describes a wide range of road and environmental design changes that either make it more difficult for a vehicle to speed or make drivers believe they should slow down for safety.17† The measures are also intended to make roads easier and safer for pedestrians and bicyclists to use. Traffic-calming measures are particularly effective at reducing speeds in residential areas.18 Common traffic-calming measures are divided into three main categories: vertical deflections, horizontal deflections and horizontal narrowing:

† The U.S. Transportation Department prepares traffic-advisory leaflets that provide illustrations and technical details about many road design features. There are also a number of useful web-based summaries and descriptions of traffic-calming measures: see, for example, TrafficCalming.org, the Federal Highway Administration, at www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/tcalm/, and the Los Angeles County Public Works Department's neighborhood traffic-management-plan toolbox, at http://ladpw.org/TNL/NTMP/.

1a. Vertical Deflection

Speed humps. Speed (or road) humps are different from speed bumps. Speed humps are about 12 feet wide and 2 to 3 inches high, and can be crossed safely at 20 to 30 mph. Properly designed, they can accommodate large vehicles such as fire trucks. Speed bumps are shorter and narrower, and can be crossed safely only at lower speeds. They can damage large vehicles. They are more appropriately installed in parking lots than on roads.††

Although the street sign describes them as "street bumps," these "speed humps" can be crossed safely by cars traveling 20 to 30 mph. (Photo credit: Kip Kellogg)

†† Some jurisdictions have experimented with placing optical illusions of speed bumps, potholes or other obstructions on the road. These devices tend to have at least a short-term effect of reducing speeds until drivers realize they are illusions. There is an obvious risk that drivers might subsequently come to believe that real obstacles are illusions and fail to slow down when they should.

Speed tables. Speed tables are similar to speed humps, but are usually long enough for the entire wheelbase of a passenger car to rest on top of the flat, top section. They are often made with brick or other textured materials to draw attention to them or improve their appearance.

Raised crosswalks. These are speed tables placed at crosswalks and outfitted with crosswalk markers to improve pedestrian visibility to motorists.

Speed cushions. Speed cushions are narrow, rectangular humps that are placed close enough to reduce the speed of passenger vehicles, but that allow vehicles with wide tracks, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to straddle them and not affect their speed.

Raised intersections. These are similar to raised crosswalks, but cover the entire intersection, identifying it as a pedestrian zone.

Textured pavements. Pavements made from brick or cobblestone can be used for entire street blocks and can substantially reduce vehicle speeds.

1b. Horizontal Deflection

Traffic circles. Traffic circles are raised islands placed at intersections where traffic volume is not a concern.

Roundabouts.††† Roundabouts are similar to traffic circles but are used in areas where traffic volume is also a consideration.

Chicanes. Chicanes are traffic deflections that narrow or redirect the road.

Realigned intersections. Realigning intersections involves putting bends and curves in the road at "T" intersections to help reduce speeds.

††† It is essential that vehicles traveling in the roundabouts have the right-of-way, rather than those entering the roundabouts, for them to be effective in reducing crashes (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1999).

1c. Horizontal Narrowing

Neckdowns. Neckdowns are built-out curbs at intersections that reduce the width of the road and the distance needed for pedestrians to cross.

Center islands. These are raised islands in the centerline of a road. They can be installed as gateways to residential neighborhoods.

Chokers. These are mid-block build-outs (sidewalk-area extensions into the road).

Other strategies include:

marking the road to create the illusion that it is narrowing,

planting trees and other foliage along roadsides,

permitting parking on both sides of residential streets,†

timing traffic signals for vehicles traveling the desired speed, and

erecting mid-block barriers that create two cul-de-sacs.

† The speed reductions achieved by permitting parking must be offset against the increased risk to pedestrians who dart into the road from between parked vehicles.

Traffic-calming measures can be expensive, however, so you must determine their cost-effectiveness over the long term. Traffic-calming measures work best if they are understood and accepted by the public, take into account the special requirements of emergency response vehicles and are reinforced with adequate levels of police enforcement.19 Properly designed, traffic-calming measures can also reduce noise levels by reducing vehicle acceleration. Without traffic-calming measures, it is difficult for police to reduce average vehicle speeds below 25 mph.20

2. Posting warning signs and signals. Painting speed limits or "SLOW" on the road surface, in combination with posting roadside signs, can help reduce speeds.21 Transverse pavement markings create the illusion of high speed, and when placed ahead of traffic hazards, have been shown to cause drivers to slow down.22 Strobe-light signals, flashing signals and warning signs painted in eye-catching fluorescent colors can improve drivers' awareness of special hazards and reduced speed limits.23 Where there are many other signs and sights competing for drivers' attention, it is hard to get drivers to notice speed warnings. Warning signs and signals are more effective if they convey why drivers should slow down (e.g., curve ahead, school zone, road construction).24 Other signs, such as those that warn of children in the area, are not known to effectively reduce speeds.25

3. Blending motor and non-motor vehicle uses of public space through urban design. In some communities, urban planners are rethinking the conventional separation of driving and nondriving uses of public space. They are removing standard barriers, signs and road markings that delineate where vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians belong, replacing them with gateways, new surface materials and street furniture, such as benches, short posts or pillars, streetlamps, waste bins, fountains, and bus stops. This reduces the traditional separation between motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians by eliminating wide, straight routes and blurring the lines between public and private space. The results are greatly reduced speeds because motorists recognize that they are sharing the space with non-motorized users and therefore must be more cautious.26 First pioneered by the Dutch, these designs are being used successfully in the United States in Seattle; Portland and Eugene, Oregon; and West Palm Beach and Sarasota, Florida.

Education Responses

The goal of education responses is to make speeding socially unacceptable. But given the current acceptability of speeding, there is the potential for a negative backlash against anti-speeding campaigns.27

4. Conducting anti-speeding public awareness campaigns. Anti-speeding public awareness campaigns have been recommended, even though their effects may not be immediate and substantial; they can help change the social acceptability of speeding and alter drivers' beliefs that they are better and safer than other drivers. 28 Public awareness campaigns need not be overtly accusatory, but should convey facts about the dangers and consequences of speeding so as to debunk common myths about speed and driving. Because many drivers say they speed merely to keep up with traffic, encouraging voluntary compliance with speed limits can help slow down those drivers who consciously or subconsciously follow other drivers' lead.

Targeted information campaigns can be even more effective than publicly broadcast campaigns. Police can issue warnings and requests directly to groups of chronic speeders if they can identify them. For example, Raleigh, North Carolina, police determined that students' parents were the most common speeders near schools: police set up warning signs in the school zones, published speeding education information in the school newsletters, and distributed warning and education information to parents stopped for speeding and those dropping off their children at school, resulting in a doubling of the percentage of drivers obeying the speed limit.29

A twist on the conventional public awareness campaign that discourages speeding is a campaign that encourages obeying the speed limit. In some campaigns of this sort, police have achieved positive results by stopping drivers and thanking them for obeying the speed limit; in others, signs have been posted indicating the percentage of drivers obeying the speed limit.30

An interesting method for making the public aware of the hazards of speeding in school zones comes from Lithuania. There, drivers are required to keep their headlights on at all times during the first week school is in session as a reminder to one another to drive carefully where children are present.

Some public awareness campaigns are professionally developed, using television, radio and billboards. These campaigns typically convey official, government-sanctioned messages about speeding risks. Anti-speeding campaigns developed at the grass-roots level are potentially even more effective than official campaigns. Using simple lawn signs, speed display boards, warning letters, or personal appeals to speeders who have been stopped, these campaigns can convey more heartfelt messages to speeders about the risks they create.

5. Informing complainants about actual speeds. Complainants do not always estimate vehicle speeds accurately. Vehicle speed almost always seems faster to a stationary pedestrian than to a moving motorist. Where you suspect that complainants' concerns may be exaggerated, you might have a police officer monitor speeds with complainants present. Some complainants may be surprised to learn that vehicles are in fact traveling the speed limit. This does not necessarily mean that speeds are appropriate for the conditions, but at a minimum it helps complainants better understand what responses might be most appropriate to remedy the problem.

Enforcement Responses

7.Enforcing speeding laws. Long-term changes in drivers' attitudes toward speeding depend on
drivers' perceived risk of being stopped.32 However, a considerable investment of resources is
required to significantly increase the risk of getting caught.33 The public generally supports
speed enforcement, especially in residential areas and other areas where there
are children.34 Speed enforcement works best if

drivers believe it will occur;

it has meaningful costs to offenders;

police apply it generally, rather than at specific times and
locations; and

drivers are not tipped off by cues as to when it is or is not
happening.35

With respect to the last condition above, you must balance
making the public aware of the enforcement campaign against allowing drivers to
anticipate precisely where and when officers are conducting enforcement. For
example, you might consider advertising on the radio that the police will be
enforcing speeding laws on particular roads on particular days, but not give
visual cues to drivers of the exact location of the speed detection devices and
officers. This will enhance the deterrent effect for drivers listening to the
radio, without reducing the deterrent effect for those who are not. You should
vary the enforcement times and locations enough so that drivers do not become
confident that they can avoid detection. Advance publicity of enforcement
campaigns also increases public support for enforcement by establishing a sense
of fairness to drivers. Explaining why police have targeted particular locations
for enforcement (e.g., there's a high rate of crashes or citizen complaints)
also increases public support.††
You should conduct enforcement both at problem locations and at randomly
selected locations to maximize deterrence.†††
Stationary marked police vehicles are more effective than moving marked police
vehicles in reducing speed.36

†† The Silverthorne, Colorado, Police Department surveyed the community to determine the thresholds at which the public believed the police should issue speeding citations at specific locations. The police issued the survey results to drivers stopped for speeding, thereby enhancing police authority to enforce speeding laws and minimizing citizen complaints about speed enforcement.

††† An Australian study concluded that posting police officers in marked police vehicles on randomly selected stretches of road at random times generally is a cost-effective way to maximize deterrence and reduce traffic crashes (Leggett 1997).

Police enforcement is expensive to maintain consistently,
and it quickly loses its effect where the enforcement effort is not visible to
drivers.37
Intensive speed enforcement also loses its effectiveness because of the typical
incentive system for traffic officers—they are rewarded for issuing citations
rather than for maintaining reduced average speeds. Consequently, as soon as
the enforcement effort has the positive effect of reducing speeds, there are
fewer violations and traffic officers move on to other locations, after which
speeds quickly resume their pre-enforcement levels.38

Drivers should not be able to easily detect when and where police are enforcing speed limits. (Photo credit: Kip Kellogg)

8. Enforcing speeding laws with speed cameras. Speed
cameras, also referred to as photo radar, are cost-effective in reducing
speeds, crashes, injuries, and fatalities, particularly when detected
violations are prosecuted.39
Police determined that speed cameras, used in conjunction with other responses,
have proved effective in reducing the percentage of speeders, vehicle crashes,
injuries, and fatalities in Victoria, Australia.40
There, police mounted speed cameras either in unmarked police vehicles or on
tripods along the roadside, without advance warnings to drivers about the
cameras' location. The police could move the cameras around so drivers could
not predict where they placed them. Speed-camera use can be effective in
residential neighborhoods as well as on major arteries and highways.41
Some drivers slow down when approaching speed cameras, but quickly speed up
once they pass.42
This can be countered by hiding the cameras better and otherwise preventing
drivers from knowing exactly where they are. In some jurisdictions, the
relatively inexpensive protective boxes in which speed cameras are placed are
mounted in many locations, leaving drivers uncertain as to which boxes actually
contain cameras at any particular time.

The public has generally accepted the use of speed cameras,
especially in high-risk zones, although there are some strong objections to the
invasion of privacy and preferences for personal interactions with enforcers.43
Some jurisdictions have experienced significant vandalism to speed cameras.44
The United Kingdom first authorized speed cameras by law in 1991; now, all
British police forces use them.Norway has used them effectively since
1988.45
Not all U.S. jurisdictions have specifically authorized speed cameras for
prosecution, and some states and municipalities have specifically rejected
proposals for their use. You should first gauge public support for speed
cameras before formally attempting to use them. In addition, some issues exist regarding
the fees companies that install and operate speed cameras charge, and how the
jurisdiction uses revenue generated from fines.

The first generation of speed cameras required that someone
take film from the cameras, to be processed. More-advanced technology allows
for more-efficient remote-image processing.46

9. Using speed display boards. Speed display boards
measure oncoming vehicles' speeds and prominently display the speeds to
drivers. Research has shown that speed display boards reduce speeds and
crashes, seem at least as effective as speed cameras and are more cost-effective.47
Speed display boards are particularly effective with drivers who do not pay
attention to their speed. Large, changeable-message signs that combine site-specific
messages with speed displays have effectively reduced speeds by as much as nine
mph in and around school speed zones.48
They are more effective when supplemented with police enforcement—in this combination,
the effect can last several weeks after they are removed. Unattended display
boards, however, are vulnerable to vandalism.

10. Arresting the worst offenders. As one method for
changing public attitudes toward speeding, some police agencies have amended
their policies and arrested serious offenders (those driving much higher than
the speed limit) rather than merely releasing them with a citation. The intent
is to convey a strong message that driving well over the speed limit is a
seriously dangerous offense and not a harmless technical infraction.†
This response may require special legislation and policies.

† The Glendale, Ariz., Police Department (1998) used this response as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce speeding. State law specifically authorized the police department’s custodial arrest policy.

11. Having citizen volunteers monitor speeding. Some
police agencies have recruited and trained citizen volunteers to operate speed
detection devices in residential areas.49
The volunteers record the vehicle speeds and license plate numbers and turn
them over to the police. Police then send official warning letters to the
registered vehicle owners. Other police agencies, such as the Madison, Wisconsin,
Police Department, have had citizens join police officers on traffic stops to
explain the community's concerns about speeding to drivers.

Responses With Limited Effectiveness

12. Reducing speed limits. Speed limits alone have
little effect on actual vehicle speeds. Reducing posted speed limits will
typically decrease actual average vehicle speeds by only one-fourth of the
reduction.50
So, for example, reducing the posted speed limit from 30 to 25 mph will reduce
actual average vehicle speeds by only a little more than one mph. When police
set speed limits lower than what most drivers consider safe (typically, the
85th percentile), the net effect is to cause many drivers to ignore those speed
limits, as well as other posted speed limits;51
if police enforcement of the reduced limits fails to establish a credible
deterrent, drivers may increasingly lose respect for all speed limits.
In some jurisdictions, a posted speed limit lower than the 85th-percentile
speed may constitute a legal defense to enforcement. Researchers should conduct
careful speed studies before police change speed limits. Similar roads should
have similar speed limits so drivers do not come to believe that police
arbitrarily set speed limits.52, ††

†† The Wisconsin Transportation Information Center (1999) published a guide for setting speed limits on local roads. Although it specifically refers to Wisconsin, much of the information applies to any jurisdiction.

Traffic and road engineers may inadvertently increase
vehicle speeds when they build extra safety margins into the road design and
speed limit.53
For example, if they want vehicles to travel 25 mph along a particular road,
they might set the speed limit at 25 mph, but design the road using accepted
guidelines for 30-mph travel, thinking this will provide an extra safety
margin. However, the accepted guidelines already have a safety margin factored
into them, resulting in a double safety margin that actually makes the road
seem travel-safe at 35 to 40 mph. Because most drivers travel at what they
perceive as safe speeds rather than the posted speed limit, they will end up
driving 10 to 15 mph faster than the engineers originally intended. This
unintended effect reflects an underlying tension in road safety—a desire on the
one hand to build roads that encourage drivers to drive at slower, safer
speeds, and a desire on the other hand to make roads safe enough for drivers
who choose to drive faster. Road and traffic engineers have often tried to
resolve this tension by making roads wider, straighter and more
obstruction-free. More recent trends have turned in the opposite direction, to
get drivers to slow down.

13. Increasing fines and penalties. Higher fines and
penalties, beyond the threshold that offenders consider meaningful, do not
continue to reduce speeds.54

14. Erecting stop signs. Many aggrieved citizens
believe that erecting stop signs along residential roads will force drivers to
slow down. They pressure elected officials and traffic engineers to erect new
stop signs. However, the unintended effects may be that drivers speed up
mid-block to make up for lost time, thereby keeping average speeds high, increasing
acceleration noise and decreasing fuel efficiency.55

15. Installing speed bumps or rumble strips. Speed bumps,
as opposed to speed humps, do not effectively reduce speeds, and can
prove hazardous.56Rumble strips—intermittent series of bumps across the road—do not reduce
speeds directly; they serve merely to warn drivers of a hazard ahead.57

16. Reengineering vehicles. New vehicle technology
holds some potential to control speeding, but most features are not yet
standard or widely accepted by the public.58Speed limiters prevent a vehicle from going faster than a set speed.
Speed limiters can be programmed to receive electronic signals from
transmitters along the road and adjust maximum speeds automatically. So-called smart
cards can electronically record a vehicle's speed and automatically report
it to police. Electronic speed indicators, reading electronic roadside
signals, warn drivers they are speeding, or speed indicators in the vehicle
electronically trigger roadside warning signals.

There is currently available more practical and increasingly
popular in-vehicle technology that records speeds and other data for later or
real-time monitoring by drivers' guardians, commonly teenage drivers' parents. Prosecutors
might also consider such technology as a conditional sentence for convicted
chronic speeders.

Summary of Responses to Speeding in Residential Areas

The table below summarizes the responses to speeding in residential areas, the mechanism by which they are intended to work, the conditions under which they should work best, and some factors you should consider before implementing a particular response. It is critical that you tailor responses to local circumstances, and that you can justify each response based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing several different responses. Law enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the problem.

...campaigns are carefully tailored for various target audiences (e.g., commuters, young male drivers)

Effects are usually not immediate and substantial; the messages need not be overtly accusatory, but may convey facts about the dangers and consequences of speeding to debunk myths about speed and driving

...drivers believe it will occur, it has meaningful costs to offenders, police apply it generally rather than only at specific times and locations, and drivers are not tipped off by cues as to when enforcement is or is not happening

Requires a lot of resources initially to change drivers' perceived risks of getting stopped; giving the public advance notice must be balanced against not allowing drivers to anticipate where and when enforcement is occurring; expensive to do consistently

Significantly increases the level of speed monitoring and enforcement, thus increasing drivers' perceptions of the risk of getting caught speeding, and serving as a deterrent

...camera placement is not too obvious, and locations are changed periodically

Drivers slow down when they know they are approaching a speed camera, but quickly speed up once they have passed it; some strong public concerns exist about invasions of privacy and absence of personal interaction in enforcement; usually requires special legislative authorization for cameras' use as evidence in prosecution; financial issues exist related to fees and uses of fine revenue

Reducing speed limits by itself will reduce average speeds only by small amounts; some speed limits are too low rather than too high, inviting disrespect for them; police should conduct careful speed studies before changing speed limits

Raleigh (N.C.)
Police Department (2003). "A Problem-Oriented Approach to Speeding in a School
Zone." Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in
Problem-Oriented Policing. Published also as Weisel, D. (2004). "Residential
Speeding in Raleigh, North Carolina. A Final Report to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community- Oriented Policing Services on the Field
Applications of the Problem-Oriented Guides Project." [Full Text]

Related POP Projects

Important!

The quality and focus of these submissions vary considerably. With the
exception of those submissions selected as winners or finalists, these
documents are unedited and are reproduced in the condition in which
they were submitted. They may nevertheless contain useful information
or may report innovative projects.